To feel sympathy to the National Trust volunteers at Felbrigg Hall?

I'm really conflicted about this.

On one hand, I think it was heavy-handed to make the badges and lanyards compulsory and am glad they're now voluntary. On the other, I think it's only a badge and a lanyard and I do wonder about the motives of some of those who were making an issue out of it.

I hadn't realise that the donor had been outed against his family's wishes, though. That, if true, seems wholly wrong.

I do take your point ovaries - perhaps you are right and I should have used a different term other than old-fashioned.

I guess now though as I could be labelled a bigoted old TERF, I'm somewhat reluctant to use that terminology myself.

"Traditional" and "bigoted" are not words that can be used interchangeably. It's time we start moving away from "Oh they're just traditional" when what we mean is racist/homophobic/sexist

Don't assume that because you think traditional is a synonym for racist/sexist/homophobic that we all do. When I say traditional I don't mean any of those things, if I did I would say that.

It's also time we start moving away from ageism too.

mostly elderly people who tend to have more traditional views

"Traditional" and "bigoted" are not words that can be used interchangeably. It's time we start moving away from "Oh they're just traditional" when what we mean is racist/homophobic/sexist.

Oh, and I say that as a historian. I really think it's a shitty thing to do.

I think it's very wrong of the NT to have done what they did.

They shouldn't have outed him against his family's will.

We have no idea if he'd have liked to be seen as 'gay' even if he had lived to see it legalised. He might have found the term itself offensive and insulting. We've no right to put labels on people who can't speak back.

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though

But what constitutes bigotry? Is it a lesbian saying that she does not want sex with a man who identifies as a woman even though he still has a penis? Is it a transwoman saying that a woman who tells her that it's different being born as a woman?

Our workplace has introduced a voluntary badge you can wear to show that you are open to having a discussion - and therefore presumably supportive of - LGBT matters.

I will not wear it because whilst I believe I'm not homophobic in any way and do not believe that anyone should be discriminated against due to their sexuality at work - but I probably have unconscious bias - I have huge issues with radical transgenderism and it's erosion of women's rights.

Also as our workplace sponsors mermaids and they have jolly chats about how great it is that young DCs can find their own gender and get f*cked for life by taking non necessary drugs as a child etc. etc. I sincerely doubt that my career is going to be enhanced in any way by a chat about such matters, seeing as if it is the cause de jour.

NT needs to realise where it's bread is buttered. It has a huge, free workforce that is made up of mostly elderly people who tend to have more traditional views. I'm glad that we live in a much more progressive society towards equality than we used to, but I can't see that forcing people to wear a badge that they feel uncomfortable about helps with anything at all. Fine to make it entirely optional.

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though

Agree with this - although I do have huge sympathy for you if you were made to feel uncomfortable grannytomine

I wonder how gay or trans people would feel if at work they were told to wear a badge supporting feminism.

I'm sure some would happily do so, but I bet some would probably say they respect others choices but they shouldn't be told to support anything.

'The problem is that lots of people don't keep their feelings to themselves '

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though .

reasons given by the volunteers have got "don't like gay stuff" written all over them

That is your interpretation, with your own bias.

They're not wrong to not want to wear badges, no matter what their own reasons are.

reasons given by the volunteers have got "don't like gay stuff" written all over them

Nail on the head toad.

Wear badges or don't wear badges, it's up to you. Just don't spout some thinly-veiled bigoted crap and expect not to be called out on it.

Oh yes, they don't like being challenged about their attitude, I don't think they even realise they are doing it half the time.

They are allowed to feel uncomfortable. That is their right in a free society, just as much as it's the right of a gay person to proclaim his or her sexuality. What they are not allowed to do is to discriminate against gays, or treat them unequally. If they are found on Facebook saying "really uncomfortable with all this gay stuff" then it's appropriate for the NT to say that they'd prefer not to have them as a volunteer any more. But they are perfectly entitled to feel uncomfortable and not want openly to support something. That's the flip side of a liberal society. The problem is that lots of people don't keep their feelings to themselves and it can be hard to deal with and even harder to prove. Take the volunteer to deliberately ignored me when I wanted to buy a ticket, I'm sure if I made a complaint to the NT she would say she thought the other volunteer was dealing with me, she didn't realise I was waiting to be served or whatever and how do you prove that she was turning her shoulder to me and treated me completely differently to other customers? Should I have to live my life fighting prejudice when I go out with my husband just because we are different colours, and the same things goes for people whose partners are the same sex. The one thing I find interesting is so often when people complain about an incident like the one I described they will be told they have a chip on their shoulder, that they just imagine it because they are black, wear a hijab, are gay or whatever but I can go out looking like an older white woman and I know I get treated differently to when I go out as half of a mixed race couple.

So I agree they can think what they like but I don't think discrimination has to be on FB before it counts, making people feel uncomfortable, unwelcome or different isn't on either and it is harder to deal with.

I think I know exactly the sort of person you describe. And yet, if challenged (something they'd think as jolly rude) they'd deny they'd done anything wrong. And the badges don't match the tweed, y'know.

Your sexuality, colour , religion whatever don't get you barred from places in the UK! It is illegal Well if you read my other post you would see that we had trouble getting the lovely volunteers at our local NT property to even sell us tickets to get in, when confronted they grudingly and rudely shoved the tickets at me. If asking volunteers to wear a rainbow lanyard "outs" the ones who only want "their sort" visiting the properties then I think that is great and look forward to the day when I can visit a NT property and not get treated like an unwanted guest.

Missymoo,

Call me jaundiced, but the reasons given by the volunteers have got "don't like gay stuff" written all over them.

None of them seem to have objected on the basis that history shouldn't be turned into politics.

It's a very English sort of muttering "...well now .. that really is a bit much ... not how we do things here .. we're respectable people, y'know".

I agree that the NT was heavy handed and shouldn't have required anyone to wear the badges but I don't think much of the reasons given.

Maisypops (and Babybarrister),

Thanks. I think that if the badge is capable of conveying more that one meaning, then that's all the more reason for not requiring a person to wear it. However, my view is that the context makes it pretty clear: this house belonged to a gay man, therefore, the badge indicates support for gay rights and more. How much more is probably a rather involved and arid discussion that deserves Ockham's razor.

The key point for me is that wearing the badge = advocacy, and while I'd expect the life of anyone to be sensitively handled by NT, I'd also expect it to be objective. Tying it into a political objective, no matter how laudable, isn't objective and Mary indeed be giving a person's life an interpretation that it won't bear. Exactly what the badge advocates is by the by.

We went to Blenheim yesterday, the home of the Dukes of Marlborough. Nobody was asking the staff to wear ducal ermine. They wore ordinary clothes and got on with their job. Nobody was asked to identify with the owner of the house. Yes and the past problems of the current Duke are not an 'issue' included in the tour talk. Not saying being gay is a problem before anyone jumps on me. It most certainly isn't.

Toad in the hole
I really don't think it's about being "uncomfortable with gay stuff".
I wouldn't wear the badge either because it's too commerial, politicised and now due to extreme trans activists synonymous to me with eroding women's rights and brainwashing/ exploiting children. I won't wear a symbol for something I don't believe in, no one else should either.
Yetanotherspartacus- agree it's not representative of certain sectors the LGBT community anymore.

Exactly Natalia.

More likely they feel uncomfortable about gay stuff.

This is kind of my point, though. They are allowed to feel uncomfortable. That is their right in a free society, just as much as it's the right of a gay person to proclaim his or her sexuality. What they are not allowed to do is to discriminate against gays, or treat them unequally. If they are found on Facebook saying "really uncomfortable with all this gay stuff" then it's appropriate for the NT to say that they'd prefer not to have them as a volunteer any more. But they are perfectly entitled to feel uncomfortable and not want openly to support something. That's the flip side of a liberal society.

My view can't be summed up in a daft little badge and I would take issue with being told I'm a bigot because I won't be forced to wear a symbol that oversimplifies a number of issues in order to tick and equalities box

Well said.